Marital Affairs

[ED]

Ed,I am waiting for your input

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

I know Armat, and wile reading passion filed and articulate aggressive posts by our respected members in this topic suddenly I remember an age old wisdom.

 

Rage and arguments are the most effective aphrodisiacs, so I remember, not in so distant past.

[Siamanto]

I know Armat, and wile reading passion filed and articulate aggressive posts by our respected members in this topic suddenly I remember an age old wisdom.

style_images/master/snapback.png

Ed, It is true that we have generated some tension and I sincerely apologize for it. Unfortunately, humans are such that, from time to time, they have to go through such tense moments when expressing themselves!

I'm doing my best to auto-censor - as much as possible??? - and I'll continue my effort!

 

 

 

Rage and arguments are the most effective aphrodisiacs, so I remember, not in so distant past.

style_images/master/snapback.png

That may or may not be the case, but it is surely not my style. I don't believe in whips. I prefer the world of Sacher-Masoch to Marquis de Sade's. (Of course, based on their literary works.)

In any case, that is certainly not how I feel it!

[Siamanto]

You’ve used this expression before, try something different it’s getting rather old.

style_images/master/snapback.png

Previously, you have suggested that

1- I should be careful with my choice of words

2- Moderate my words when I address you

3- Reconsider my style

4-...

Now, you are suggesting that I should not repeat - at least - certain expressions!

Shall I, in the future, PM you each an every post in order to get your permission and blessing?

How do you explain this urge to give orders?

 

 

 

The fact that you lack the humor and the mental agility to to comprehend anything that  is beyond your rigid and narrowly focused and maybe overly rationalist mindframe,

style_images/master/snapback.png

Where I exceeded at rationality you have certainly balanced it out by lack of. .

style_images/master/snapback.png

You seem to have an extremely high opinion of yourself!

If a Rationalist should be considered as a rational person, then an Idealist should be considered an ideal person!

I find you to be a Rationalist, but not necessarily rational. For the record, I even mentioned the poor Logic of your arguments. With the same token, rejecting Rationalist thinking does not mean being irrational or illogical!

Your over confidence is not helping you!

 

 

 

It is a public forum and I would hope that your universe is not limited to my posts or me, otherwise I would really have something to worry about.

style_images/master/snapback.png

I understand the validity or value of such a questioning, but I don't understand the intent or value of your question. You have access to all threads of the forum and could have easily answered the question yourself!

For the record, I'm simply replying to your posts! If you don't like the effects, don't produce the cause! (Funkadelic)

 

 

 

Are you telling me that one should constrain oneself  and conform oneself to your - or someone else's - Mental World and Psyche? I wonder what happened to your speech about Passion, Individuality, non-Conformism and...?

style_images/master/snapback.png

I don’t believe that I stated such nonsense in anyone of my posts. In fact, it is you who seems to clamor my beliefs by imposing your own in an overly righteous manner. Don’t worry all of those attributes are still visible to those willing to open their eyes.

style_images/master/snapback.png

Nobody said you did!

An interrogative statement does not assert a fact! It does not provide an answer, it raises a question!

For the record, the intent of the question was to bring attention to the fact that those "attributes" seem to matter only when it's about you!

A bon entendeur Salut!

 

 

 

Surely if you keep muddling equivocal meanings in your trite statements it may indeed take a lifetime to formulate them into coherent statements.

style_images/master/snapback.png

Your reaction is so emotional that you're not even ready to discuss it. You prefer to conveniently discard them as "trite statements" or "nonsensical" or...

 

 

 

This is irrelevant, don’t indulge yourself in such banalities. A knowledgeable person may still crave for education to enhance her intelligence, that doesn’t mean that she is deprived of it. Just as a passionate person may turn to excitement to beef up the supply. Therefore your argument is invalid. And you are wrong once again, passion is not innate, it’s acquired through experience and excitement, thus one is intertwined with the other.

style_images/master/snapback.png

IT IS RELEVANT! You, based on poor Logic, drew an analogy between:

"Excitement is but a depurate longing for Passion."

"Fun is a constant denial of the Unhappy."

and

“Education is but a desperate longing for Knowledge.”

 

I replied, explaining that the analogy is only illusive. Below was my response:

First of all, Education is a means to bring Knowledge to us. Excitement is NOT a means to bring Passion into us.

Second of all, Knowledge IS NOT innate, Passion IS!

Most of all, the concept of Education is based on the awareness of a innate LACK of Knowledge! We wouldn't have Educational Institutions if we thought that we were already full of Knowledge!

There's no denial in this case. At the contrary, full awareness.

 

 

A knowledgeable person may still crave for education to enhance her intelligence, that doesn’t mean that she is deprived of it. Just as a passionate person may turn to excitement to beef up the supply. Therefore your argument is invalid.

style_images/master/snapback.png

Your argument is viciously circular! It assumes that "excitement" and "Passion" are comparable and of similar nature to prove that "excitement" and "Passion" are comparable and of similar nature!

I really recommend you to improve your knowledge of Logic. For a rationalist, you really lack Logic!

Also, it is Passion that drives a person towards more knowledge, not knowledge itself!

 

 

 

And you are wrong once again, passion is not innate, it’s acquired through experience and excitement, thus one is intertwined with the other.

style_images/master/snapback.png

You are confusing "acquiring a taste" and "being passionate" or "having a passion."

In my world Passion is fundamental and essential. I don't need your passion made of plastic or some other synthetic material, even when they're more colorful.

Edited November 26, 2004 by Siamanto

[Siamanto]

Continuation! [Too many "quotes" in the original message!]

 

 

 

From your response regarding “touching” it’s highly doubtful that you did, but I am not going to argue your ad hoc defense attempt.

style_images/master/snapback.png

This is becoming a bit too silly!

Let me put it differently: considering that almost every English speaking member of this forum knows what the French "touché" means, then what is the likelihood that a person from France would not recognize the word?

I will let you figure it out! A good exercise in Logic!

 

 

 

I had no idea that you’ve nominated yourself as the spokesperson of my opinion.

You’ll be making accurate accusation if you were to reduce it to one person in particular. Most of your views are judgmental, tactless and condescending and most importantly lack the necessary formula to be considered seriously. Moreover you have managed to completely vitiate this thread. Perhaps a deflation of that self-amplified tumescence may help the situation.

P.S. This is not a criticism and nothing personal!

style_images/master/snapback.png

Amen.

 

For the record, it takes two to tango! Please be mature enough to assume responsibility of your acts! Thank you!

 

 

P.S. This is not a criticism and nothing personal!

style_images/master/snapback.png

I'm fine with that! Freedom of expression does not disturb me!

[Azat]

es shat eq sharnakelu sireli Anileve yev Siamanto?

[Anileve]

Continuation! [Too many "quotes" in the original message!]

This is becoming a bit too silly!

Let me put it differently: considering that almost every English speaking member of this forum knows what the French "touché" means, then what is the likelihood that a person from France would not recognize the word?

I will let you figure it out! A good exercise in Logic!

style_images/master/snapback.png

25 is the number I got when I began counting your exclamation marks, after 25 I lost count. For someone who has a lot to say about excitement indicating lack of passion, with the multitude of exclamations you certainly exude lots of excitement. And according to your theory you must be longing for passion. Hence this extensive public display of foreplay.

 

I prefer the world of Sacher-Masoch to Marquis de Sade's. (Of course, based on their literary works.)

style_images/master/snapback.png

Yes, yes, you can be my slave. All you had to do is ask directly instead of flooding this thread with your flatulence.

[Anileve]

es shat eq sharnakelu sireli Anileve yev Siamanto?

style_images/master/snapback.png

I am also curious.

[Armat]

Eve jan kareli e es el c@ struk@ linem?

[ED]

Eve jan kareli e es el c@ struk@ linem?

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

du et avatarov djvar te darnas Rubo jan

[Anileve]

Eve jan kareli e es el c@ struk@ linem?

style_images/master/snapback.png

Armat jan, kneres buyt qo glxarkov yev bexerov yes djvarutyun kunenam im mtraka oktagortsem. Ho parav papikin chem xpi, erevuma vor vraz kngni, heto ira xexch xochkarnera inch kanen?

 

du et avatarov djvar te darnas Rubo jan

style_images/master/snapback.png

Ahahaha! Edo jan, yes hents etey mtatsum.

[Siamanto]

es shat eq sharnakelu sireli Anileve yev Siamanto?

style_images/master/snapback.png

Short and sweet: sorry!

[Siamanto]

Yes, yes, you can be my slave. All you had to do is ask directly instead of flooding this thread with your flatulence.

style_images/master/snapback.png

Sometimes a sign warns us of an danger or a hazard. Usually, little intellectual effort is required to recognize the warning sign and manage to avoid the hazard. However, some - overconfident of their steps - ignore and/or "filter out" - as they may say - the sign and march proudly into the hazard, maybe the trap.

The hazard - maybe the trap - was:

I don't believe in whips. I prefer...Sacher-Masoch to Marquis de Sade's.

style_images/master/snapback.png

The warning sign was:

I prefer the world of Sacher-Masoch to Marquis de Sade's.(Of course, based on their literary works.)

style_images/master/snapback.png

At this point, it is very likely that the reader already guessed who fell in the pit, maybe the trap!

The most valuable lesson I've learned on Wall Street is that both overconfidence/hope and fear are the trader's - or investor's - worst enemy! The same is true in life!

 

I see that you totally ignore the works of Sacher-Masoch and Marquis de Sade, yet, you seem to think that you understand what it is about!

To understand how and why the "world of Sacher-Masoch" has nothing - or little - to do with the commonly accepted understanding of "masochist" and/or how and why the "world of Marquis de Sade" has nothing - or little - to do with the commonly accepted understanding of "sadist," I recommend the 150 page excellent introduction of Gilles Deleuze to "Venus In Furs." Considering the reputation of Deleuze, it's very likely that it has been translated into English!

In French, "masocheen" is opposed to "masochiste" - the English "masochist." In a similar way, "sadiste" is opposed to "sadique" - the English "sadist."

The point is that a "masocheen" does NOT complement a "sadiste" - in French. The "world of Sacher-Masoch" is exclusive of the "world of Marquis de Sade." They are NOT opposites, they do not meet!

It seem that your overconfidence - AGAIN - played a trick on you!

 

As for the proposition of us having a "relationship," no matter it's nature:

First of all, no thanks!

Second of all, I don't think you have what it takes: you can't even whip without hitting yourself and bleed. I believe in higher standards! Ter shad hats abour gouzek! Furthermore, I don't enjoy the sight of someone bleeding!

Most of all, I wouldn't be interested in a relationship with such dynamics!

 

 

 

25 is the number I got when I began counting your exclamation marks, after 25 I lost count. For someone who has a lot to say about excitement indicating lack of passion, with the multitude of exclamations you certainly exude lots of excitement. And according to your theory you must be longing for passion. Hence this extensive public display of foreplay.

style_images/master/snapback.png

First of all, an exclamation is not necessarily the expression of excitement. You need to consult a dictionary.

Second of all, I thought that my theory made no sense and was useless, why are you using it to "whip?"

Most of all, your reasoning is based on unfounded and wrong premises. AGAIN!

You desperately need a Handbook of Logic! It seems that more you whip, more you hit yourself!

 

By the way, why 25? You can't count higher?

[Siamanto]

Eve jan kareli e es el c@ struk@ linem?

style_images/master/snapback.png

Stroke? Why do want to hurt her? That is not nice!

Edited November 27, 2004 by Siamanto

[Anileve]

I see that you totally ignore the works of Sacher-Masoch and Marquis de Sade, yet, you seem to think that you understand what it is about!

To understand how and why the "world of Sacher-Masoch" has nothing - or little - to do with the commonly accepted understanding of "masochist" and/or how and why the "world of Marquis de Sade" has nothing - or little - to do with the commonly accepted understanding of "sadist," I recommend the 150 page excellent introduction of Gilles Deleuze to "Venus In Furs." Considering the reputation of Deleuze, it's very likely that it has been translated into English!

In French, "masocheen" is opposed to "masochiste" - the English "masochist." In a similar way, "sadiste" is opposed to "sadique" - the English "sadist."

The point is that a "masocheen"  does NOT complement a "sadiste" - in French. The "world of Sacher-Masoch" is exclusive of the "world of Marquis de Sade." They are NOT opposites, they do not meet!

It seem that your overconfidence  - AGAIN - played a trick on you!

First of all let’s clarify one thing here, unless the reading was part of your Literature course, lewd sexual endeavors must have inspired you to read those works. I don’t believe for a second that a disinterest in a certain subject would provoke one to pick up works of men who relished in such unconventional libertine existence.

 

Second of all, let’s cut the semantics here, it is because of Sacher-Masoch and Marquis de Sade terms such as “masochist” and “sadist” were coined. The point here is that you have chosen to identify with the world of someone who preferred to be in the power of women who tortured him as opposed to the one who was a misogynist. That’s stated loud and clear in your response to Armat. And hey, that's alright with me, no need to live in denial.

 

As for the proposition of us having a "relationship," no matter it's nature:

First of all, no thanks!

Second of all, I don't think you have what it takes: you can't even whip  without hitting yourself and bleed. I believe in higher standards! Ter shad hats abour gouzek! Furthermore, I don't enjoy the sight of someone bleeding!

Most of all, I wouldn't be interested in a relationship with such dynamics!

Your continuous arguments with me prove otherwise, unless you are on a holistic mission to somehow reform me, in which case I have to warn you that it’s an impossible task.

 

As high as your inflated ego carried you, I would hate to burst it but I have to be frank. I never proposed a “relationship” for it would be much of an effort on my behalf and hardly an exciting one, for you seem to hold yourself in the highest regard and it would be an impossible task for me to enter into such a contract, since evidently you have already formed a very strong relationship with yourself.

 

The most valuable lesson I've learned on Wall Street is that both overconfidence/hope and fear are the trader's - or investor's - worst enemy! The same is true in life!

Oh, I should have known! Wall Street explains this overbearing affair with your flatulence. You must be a stockbroker.

 

First of all, an exclamation is not necessarily the expression of excitement. You need to consult a dictionary.

Second of all, I thought that my theory made no sense and was useless, why are you using it to "whip?"

Most of all, your reasoning is based on unfounded and wrong premises. AGAIN!

You desperately need a Handbook of Logic! It seems that more you whip, more you hit yourself!

Exclamation marks were invented to express excitement, to emphasize a point. I am afraid it is you who should seriously consider an investment into a good dictionary, you know the one which doesn’t cater to your selective understanding of a subject.

 

Perhaps the financial world is not your true calling, since you appear to be such an expert in logic, a pseudo Logician would be more of an appropriate career. Just think how the world is in such urgent need of yet another flake like Dr. Phil.

 

By the way, why 25? You can't count higher?

style_images/master/snapback.png

25 is when I lose the interest in counting your endless punctuation marks which give off a stench of condescendence and vile grunt of gastrointestinal excretion you consider a “opinion.” Do everyone a favor, fall out of love with yourself.

[Armat]

Eve there is that danger that once you do have an affair with this guy and this poor creature gets all emotional and commits himself to you like a slimy bloodsucker that would not let go and become a pest then you’ll have no choice then to quite your job. Number one rule is never mess with coworkers.

[Stormig]

Number one rule is never mess with coworkers.

style_images/master/snapback.png

I agree. Though that research assistant back in school didn't have to turn me down.

No, seriously. I think that of all that's been said here, what Armat says has resonated the most in my head.

[Azat]

unfortunately i have to agree with Armat here, although many people find their mates at a work place.

[Armat]

Eve you also said you easily lose interest or get bored from a person you are involved. I am like you in character…and that’s why my head is occupied in creative ways. The truth may be that you have not met your equal or someone (like me ) who does change and grow and provide intellectual and physical challenge. Don’t lose hope you’ll find that person.

[Azat]

or me

[Siamanto]

Your continuous arguments with me prove otherwise, unless you are on a holistic mission to somehow reform me, in which case I have to warn you that it’s an impossible task.

style_images/master/snapback.png

Should everything be about YOU? You have repeatedly expressed that feeling and I've already replied that it was NOT the case? Some may consider it as a sign of insecurity? Of course, the answer lies within you!

You have to recognize that you publicly put forward and advertise a well defined Philosophy of life. When putting forward such strong opinions, you should expect public criticism. That it the foundation of freedom of speech!

You allow yourself to criticize others, yet you do not tolerate criticism! Be a grown up and assume yourself.

 

My original statement:

"Excitement is but a desperate longing for Passion."

"Fun is a constant denial of the Unhappy."

Was an overt criticism of the American Hedonistic Culture and its self-righteous Propaganda. Few will disagree that Hedonism dictates many aspects of life and moral values in the US. Furthermore, those values are portrayed as "Happiness" and the constant need for excitement as driven by Passion: that is what I call "self-righteous Propaganda." I disagree with that Philosophy of Life and I have all the rights to criticize it, specially when such a Culture is being exported.

I have read your posts for the last three months and I believe that you share that Philosophy to some regards and my comments were not out of place.

 

Thank you for the warning - you really enjoy giving warnings and orders - but my "task" is not to "reform" you: why would I do that? Why would I care? As I have ALREADY explained in a previous post, my audience is not limited to yourself, even when I'm replying to you! I would have PMed you, if that was the case!

(By the way, "task," "reform?" What a peculiar choice of words. Is this the military or the Department of Correction? )

 

In some regards, your warnings, orders and intolerance of criticism remind me of a MACHO man: his bravado - a facade, insecurity and fragility!

 

 

 

 

Oh, I should have known! Wall Street explains this overbearing affair with your flatulence. You must be a stockbroker.

style_images/master/snapback.png

How did you come to that conclusion? As usual, your overconfidence is playing tricks on you! You seem to be confusing Reality and the emotions driven "thought process" within you! They don't seem to coincide; they hardly overlap!

 

By the way, why a stock broker and not a trader: I only mentioned trader (and investor ?) Why not an investor: most are exposed to Wall Street as investors? Why not as an intern? Why not as a clerk: maybe because you think too high of me?

Why not an IT professional? Why not as an attorney? Why not as an artist: Graphic or Web Designer, Investment Bankers employ all kinds of artists and consume Art? etc. etc.

 

Do you ever question your overconfident self? Do you take the time to assess

1- The quality of your facts/data? (What are the known facts?)

2- The consistence and coherence of your arguments? (How did you come to that conclusion?)

3- The validity and relevance of your goal i.e. the purpose of the argument? (Does it matter if I'm a stock broker or not?)

 

The quality of your arguments are so poor, unfounded and illogically constructed, that I will have to spare myself the unpleasant burden of another reply! "J'ai d'autres chats a fouetter!" (That is a very common expression that means: "I have other things to do." I'm sure your interpretation of it will be AGAIN predictably off!)

We'll probably meet again on other threads!

 

 

 

As high as your inflated ego carried you, I would hate to burst it but I have to be frank. I never proposed a “relationship”

style_images/master/snapback.png

Let's look at the FACTS:

Yes, yes, you can be my slave. All you had to do is ask directly instead of flooding this thread with your flatulence.

style_images/master/snapback.png

As for the proposition of us having a "relationship," no matter it's nature:

...

style_images/master/snapback.png

First of all, a master-slave relationship IS a relationship!

Second of all, in my reply, relationship was in quotes, followed by an emoticon. Your rigid mind lacks humor! Humor is the "oxygen" of the mind!

Most of all, "if you don't like the effect, don't produce the cause" and please, have the courage to assume your statements and behavior!

 

 

 

 

 

for it would be much of an effort on my behalf and hardly an exciting one, for you seem to hold yourself in the highest regard and it would be an impossible task for me to enter into such a contract, since evidently you have already formed a very strong relationship with yourself.

style_images/master/snapback.png

True, we would probably bore each other. I know I would be bored with a Sadian like you! I was simply replying to your suggestion! If you don't like the effect, don't produce the cause!

 

 

 

 

 

First of all let’s clarify one thing here, unless the reading was part of your Literature course, lewd sexual endeavors must have inspired you to read those works. I don’t believe for a second that a disinterest in a certain subject would provoke one to pick up works of men who relished in such unconventional libertine existence.

style_images/master/snapback.png

As presumptuous as ever! Your imagination is so poor that you can't consider situations beyond the possibilities of your own world.

Also, considering your previous avatar, your signature and the current thread's topic, your comment can only reflect a HYPOCRITE self! Suddenly, you became a "Sainte Nitouche?" (I don't know how to translate it.)

 

First of all, you ignore their work and your judgment is based on PURE IGNORANCE!

Second of all, different countries have different Cultures and perceptions of the morality of Literature, Art or...Those novels are widely read and available in many pocket book editions.

Third of all, maybe I have read Sacher-Masoch because I have studied Philosophy with Deleuze for many years. Maybe I have read Marquis de Sade, because Lacan wrote many papers about his Philosophy and Ethics. etc. etc.

Before you ridicule yourself and accuse them of...it is very unlikely that Deleuze nor Lacan have studied them for "lewd sexual endeavors." You need to broaden your narrow minded and poor "imagination??"

 

By the way, I found many "masochean" elements in Paradjanov's "Hreghen Tsier@" (I hope that my translation is correct!)

Probably because of the many Ukrainian rural folklore and tales, common with Poland.

Shall I feel shame or awkward that I saw and/or recommend the movie?

 

Ignorance is not an excuse to defamate. What's next? Lynching or the "purifying" fire?

 

For the record, you perfectly fit in a Sadian decor:

1- Your excessively Rationalist Philosophy of life

2- Your "punitive" Ethics towards what you perceive as "weak"

I am sorry for not feeling pity for those women. They belong on Jerry Springer's show, sobbing and defending their husbands with the most moronic excuse "But I love him!

style_images/master/snapback.png

Ignoring Marquis de Sade's Philosophy and Ethics, you may not understand what I mean.

Edited November 28, 2004 by Siamanto

[Siamanto]

Continuation.............

 

 

 

 

Second of all, let’s cut the semantics here, it is because of Sacher-Masoch and Marquis de Sade terms such as “masochist” and “sadist” were coined.

style_images/master/snapback.png

That is in conformance with my explanation. Often, words either lose their original meaning or are initially based on misconceptions! That is obviously the case with "masochist/masochean" and "Sadist/Sadian."

I was simply providing a clarification!

 

 

 

 

The point here is that you have chosen to identify with the world of someone who preferred to be in the power of women who tortured him as opposed to the one who was a misogynist.

style_images/master/snapback.png

AGAIN, let's rewind back and consider the FACTS!

I replied to Edward:

I prefer the world of Sacher-Masoch to Marquis de Sade's.(Of course, based on their literary works.)

style_images/master/snapback.png

I don't how that constitutes an identification with the world of Sacher-Masoch - THAT YOU TOTALLY IGNORE .

 

 

 

That’s stated loud and clear in your response to Armat. And hey, that's alright with me, no need to live in denial.

style_images/master/snapback.png

Concerning the pan, the intent was different. I apologize if it was misunderstood. Also, I admit that my comment may have seemed out of line in the existing situation.

Sadly, you allow yourself such comments, but that should not justify mine.

 

 

 

Exclamation marks were invented to express excitement, to emphasize a point. I am afraid it is you who should seriously consider an investment into a good dictionary, you know the one which doesn’t cater to your selective understanding of a subject.

style_images/master/snapback.png

First of all, I see that you have moderated your statement by changing your definition to include "emphasize a point." Well, that was my point, thank you!

For the record, there are other uses - consult a dictionary! In any case, that invalidates your previous assumptions and statements!

 

Second of all, what is the relevance? What's the point?

Maybe you should copyright your statement: "Exclamation points exude lost of excitement"

and sell it to the Entertainment Industry!

 

 

 

Perhaps the financial world is not your true calling, since you appear to be such an expert in logic, a pseudo Logician would be more of an appropriate career. Just think how the world is in such urgent need of yet another flake like Dr. Phil.

style_images/master/snapback.png

First of all, we have already covered the "stock broker Theory."

Second of all, if the word is "pseudo Logician" then would you please illustrate it with examples? You have the habit of labeling without the proper explanation and examples.

 

 

 

 

25 is when I lose the interest in counting your endless punctuation marks which give off a stench of condescendence and vile grunt of gastrointestinal excretion you consider a “opinion.” Do everyone a favor, fall out of love with yourself.

style_images/master/snapback.png

Back to the Fundamental Theory of exclamation points!

Yesterday they were a sign of excitement and maybe a "longing for Passion." Today they express "condescendence and vile grunt of gastrointestinal excretion." Can you please make up your mind? Thanks!

I'm sorry if I bring up the "brat" in you! That is not my intention!

Please enjoy - to use your words - your "Jerry Springer Show," all by yourself!

Edited November 28, 2004 by Siamanto

[vava]

oh boy.

[Armen]

oh boy.

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

Vava, that's an excellent way to make a point

[vava]

errrr... Armen, you're not being sacrastic now, are you?

[Armen]

No Vava